Ownership and Review Cadence

The maintenance system begins with two decisions made at publication time: who owns this document, and when will it be reviewed? These decisions are not post-publication formalities. They are structural elements of the playbook itself — as important as the trigger conditions and the step lists. A playbook published without an assigned owner and a review date has been abandoned at the moment of its creation.

1. Match the review cadence to the process volatility A high-volatility process — one where the underlying tools, rules, or circumstances change frequently — needs a quarterly review cadence. A stable process can sustain an annual review. Applying the same cadence to all documents regardless of volatility produces either over-review of stable documents (wasted effort) or under-review of volatile ones (accumulated inaccuracy). Set the cadence based on how fast the underlying reality changes, not based on organizational preference for a uniform cadence.
2. Build the review into the owner's calendar A review cadence that exists in a document header but not in a calendar is aspirational documentation. The owner should have a recurring calendar event for each playbook they own, scheduled at the review cadence, with enough time to actually read the document against the current process and make changes if needed. The calendar event is the commitment mechanism. Without it, the review competes with everything else and loses.
3. Create a review log in the document At the end of each review — whether changes were made or not — the owner should update the review log in the document footer: date reviewed, reviewer name, changes made (or "no changes required"). This log tells future readers whether the document is actively maintained or has been quietly abandoned, and it gives auditors a record of the maintenance discipline.